DU90 wrote:

Tough loss especially when you lose by 1 point and shoot 8-15 from the free throw line and miss at least 8 or more layups throughout the game.

This loss was entirely on Burt and staff for their awful defensive strategy in the second half that employed a man-to-man defense that LaSalle attacked repeatedly by setting up one-on-one matchups, mostly against Meg McConnell.  Instead of protecting McConnell and preventing the wide open drives to the basket by switching to a ZONE defense, we continued to allow Meg to be the sacrificial lamb.

On the final inbound play with :07, we had Meg defend the pass?  WHY would we not put in Bovell and have her or Hamilton on the ball to defend the pass and MAKE IT HARDER for them to inbound the ball??  I love Meg's tenacious defense, but she got abused tonight and the staff made NO ADJUSTMENTS to help her.

I also lay this blame entirely on Burt for failing to play Pouye in the 2nd half.  Unless she is sick or hurt, she should have been in the game.  Again this is on BURT!  You don't sit the conference player of the week in a game YOU needed to win tonight.  If he sat her because he wasn't happy with her attitude then he lost the game because he was mad at one of his best players and again that is on HIM!

I was at the men's game so I didn't see the girls play.  I get your points on defensive strategy, but it seems that the missed layups and foul shots would not be on the coaches.  

DU90 --  Ever hear the phrase "there is more than that meets the eye"

Last night I thought the game started at 7 -- so when I turned it on - it was already half time --  Things you pointed out are FACTUALLY correct.  BUT 

You mentioned Fatou was player of the week -- Last Night she was 0-5 from the field - 1 point in 13 minutes --  Perhaps you might have wanted a more of a chance for her to "shoot herself out of it "-  but had she been playing more -  perhaps the team falls further behind --  (or maybe she DOES get hot)

Before the last shot by LaSalle --  Who made the crucial pass into Precious --  Megan -- had Megan been on the bench and not on the floor to get a more athletic -  would the last sequence even happen??  Or would DU have been down by 1 -  LaSalle ball with 7 seconds to go --  DU forced to foul??

A two point deficit as halftime on the road is not always a time to make half time adjustments. Hindsight is 20/20 

Had the team switched to a zone --  perhaps LaSalle could have scored the same number of points in a different way. Scored MORE to the point where they had a comfortable lead??  Scored LESS to the point where the last minute of the game didn't really matter??

Do I completely absolve the staff??  No --  With the 7 seconds to go --  I'm almost pleading to my computer - Put Halle in --  If there is ONE player on the team (out of 13)  She is the one whom I would have at the top of the list.

On the inbounds pass which resulted in the steal  I'm saying please have Megan inbound the ball to Libby or Tess --  But also thinking have some distance between them so the person guarding against the pass does not become an extra defender -- just because she happens to be in the area. A "virtual handoff" can increase the chance that the player receiving it may travel in the process. Not to mention the separation can possibly drain a few seconds before the team can foul.

I've been talking about Parity in the A-10 all year --  This was a case of two teams relatively even matched - came down to one play - they made the last one --  I'm sure some of their fans could have said "if only this or only that --  we could have-- we should have.....

IF that last shot had somehow rimmed OUT..  and all THIS discussion revolves around the last 30 seconds of the game -- and we could be talking about a 3 game win streak and ......

But as I said previously -- if ifs and buts were candy and nuts...

DO appreciate the passion you have!!!!!!

  

Al,

I am going to start by saying that if my response offends, you I apologize, but I really don't think you understand much about basketball.  I really don't understand what points you are trying to make at all.  I am talking about basketball, efficient offense and defensive tactics through coaching adjustments that lead to victory.  Your comments don't counter any of my points of criticism which are legitimate.  Your comment about reduced turnovers leads me to believe you are a fan that doesn't understand how the game is played.  I don't want you to think I am attacking you, but your post makes little sense to me and doesn't refute any of the basketball points I have made.

Your comment about Pouye make no sense to me at all.  Maybe there was more you wanted to say, but your comment makes made me shake me head as I have no idea what you are trying to say.   Are you trying to insinuate that her poor shooting is why she was on on the bench, for most of, if not all of the second half?. Coaching staffs will make what are called offensive-defensive substitutions, especially late in the game.  Point is you take out a weaker player on one side of the ball and replace them with another player that is stronger suited to one side of the ball or the other.  It is situational basketball that every team practices for.   

At the open house this summer, Coach Abel told me how excited the staff was about Pouye because she brought a level of athleticism to Duquesne that hasn't been around in a long time.  The point I am making which you didn't counter at all, was that her size and athleticism would have helped in the 4th quarter when the LaSalle game plan was to attack Meg McConnell.  If she was inserted to defend the inbound pass, it may have been harder for LaSalle to get off the open look they had and maybe her presence would have led to getting the rebound that LaSalle got and converted for the game winning basket.

Pouye is athletic enough to defend 1 through 5.  If you don't know what I mean, I am saying that she can defend any of 5 offensive players on the floor.  She would have had no trouble defending against the smaller guard from LaSalle that repeatedly attacked Meg in the 4th quarter and quite frankly all game.  LaSalle made their offensive strategy to attack Meg in the first half as well.   

You bring up Bovell, and I love her spirit, but she has lost a few steps due to the horrible luck she's had at Duquesne.  She is not as fast as she once was and has become an offensive liability and teams know they don't have to guard her when she is on the floor so when she is out there, we are essentially playing 4 on 5 when we have the ball.  Again, I am not being critical here, but in reality, she is not the same player she was when she came here because of the injuries.

As for you talking about offensive efficiency in a 2-point game, I have no clue what point your are trying to make.  I didn't say the problem was on the offensive side of the ball.  You watched the game, did you not see LaSalle run the same isolation play against Meg in the 4th quarter where the rest of the players were on the other side of the court?  They ran it at least 3 times in a row.  And each time, the play took a long time to develop, which could have been disrupted had we run another defender against the LaSalle guard especially since her back was to McConnell.  

I am not sure you realize this, but a zone defense when used can prevent an open drive to the basket.  Given the lack of shooting expertise from the 3 point line in the women's game as compared to the men's game, you lower the risk of giving up layups like we saw last night as there would have been another defender in the area that would have picked up the guard when driving to the hoop. 

Now the way to beat a zone is with good ball movement to make the defense shift to cover the open gaps, but we have good enough defenders to recover for the most part.  Not switching to a zone defense cost us the lead in the 4th quarter.  I hope you now understand why I am harping on the coaching staffs failure to adjust by changing the defense.

And since you brought up offense, I'll play that card too.  Did you notice how LaSalle played straight up man and covered Tess Myers like a blanket?  She rarely had an open look and that was because we never ran an offensive set designed to get her an open look by setting up a good screen for an a 3.  

I will point to a couple of plays we could have done to improve the offense that would have eased up the defensive pressure on Myers. I don't recall us setting a good ball screen that led to an open 3 for Tess or pick-n-pop back to Johnson or Hamilton for an open 3, but those are common plays  The best way to attack the man-to-man is by passing and screening in a motion offense to that leads to openings to the basket for a drive or an open jump-shot.

Last night our offense consisted of standing around on offense and passing the ball with no sense of purpose and then either LIbby or Meg drove the baseline where they got caught against the defense.  I don't think we ran one offensive set to set up an open look.  If we were trying to run a motion offense, we didn't do the one thing that is required: motion by constant movement.    

I will say this, our final inbound pass that resulted in the turnover was poorly designed, we didn't set a screen to free up Myers, instead, she came to the ball and was trapped against the sideline surrounded by 2 defenders (3 when you count the sideline) and it was an easy steal for LaSalle.  On the flip side, LaSalle threw their inbound pass toward the front court, instead of going away from the basket like we did.  I hope you can see the difference between those two plays where we were going away from our own basket and they were going toward theirs.  Remember, at the time of that inbound pass, we had a 1 point lead.  The entire play should have been designed to get a pass going toward our basket, not away.  By throwing the ball into the front court toward our basket, we have more options, instead, Myers was stripped of the ball and she was the only defender because everyone else was the behind the play.  

Going back to the last inbound play for LaSalle, we still had a 1 point lead with just :07 on the clock.  There was more than enough time to bring in a substitution to put a sizeable defender on the ball which would have made it a more difficult pass in for LaSalle.  

The game winning shot was a bit of luck on the part of the LaSalle player, but one that could have been prevented if we had another larger player to rebound the basketball.  

I stand by my point that the coaching staff lost the game by poor defensive strategy and there is not one point in your responses that actually challenges what I wrote.  Despite the injuries we have had this year, with better coaching we would be among the top 5 teams in the league.  It's not about parity, it's about good coaching making the proper adjustments at halftime and in-game and substitutions that put players into a position for success.  

I don't have the confidence in this coaching staff to make the necessary decisions to set this team up for success.  

 

I don't think YOU understand what I'm trying to say either --  You are entitled to your comments/opinions -  

I CONCEDED a better in bounds play could have been drawn up and mentioned some possibilites - 

Consider THIS had the team matched the 12 turnovers in the second half and wound up with 24 in the game --  Would you have made a comment along the lines of "The team made 12 turnovers in the first half and then an additional 12 in the second half -- WHY DIDN'T THE COACHING STAFF MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT???  Yes I saw LaSalle trying to isolate on Megan --  But you point out "half time adjustments"  I point out one that may have taken place -  (to DU's benefit) You dismiss it off hand -  so WHAT WAS BEHIND THE REDUCTION (over 50% in the turnovers?

You talk about "having the tallest players on the floor"  WHO leads the team in rebounding - Megan?  Laia (second tallest player on the team - played briefly in the first half --  Should SHE have been inserted - remember we are talking about 7 seconds.  Or is "that different and not what you meant"  There is more to rebounding than size.

I conceded YOU have legitimate points --  Yet when I talk about a 25 point first half while allowing 27 - You bring up DEFENSIVE ADJUSTMENTS --  When I suggest Offensive Adjustments -  You say "that's not what I meant"

You used Fatou's being a Player of the Week as a Criteria as to whether she should have played more -  I referenced her 0-5 shooting -- Even after I conceded she might have gotten hot  you talk some about how well she defends.

My opinion about Halle was she should have been on the floor for 7 seconds in a DEFENSIVE Position - Against Fordham she spent some time guarding their PG who was their best player -  at times she guards bigs on the other team --  You point out above her LIMITED OFFENSIVE SKILLS.  I think she is at least one of the top 5 defenders on the team.  

I remember a comment once when Cinacola was questioned about HIS substitutions and he said "Well I DONT HAVE OR USE A CRYSTAL BALL)

One other point -  Fans can be CONVINCED that they know more than coaches --  If a team wins "X" games the fans can be convinced '  if they only did things MY way they would win X+2 or X+5 games.
or whatever the case may be.

I admit I'm a Casual Fan --  YOU seem to be trying to come across as a HOOPS MENSA - I remain convinced that with the time the coaching staff spends on film etc - THEY are in the best position to make the decisions they do (rightly or wrongly) Not someone who watches the games on television and/or goes to the Cooper Center at times.

 

DU90 wrote:

Al,

I was involved with our men's basketball team for 4 years and worked for Jim Satalin and John Carroll.  I am not passing myself off as a mensa, I am giving insight into what I was part of everyday for four years.  I know a lot more about basketball than a casual fan does.  I have pointed to the obvious flaws within the coaching schematics as to why we lost.

I will tell you that every team practices situational basketball events.  You put time on the clock and you are either ahead by a point or two or down by the same margin.  The purpose is to focus on what player-combinations work best depending upon the end-of-game scenario.  It is up to the coaches to understand their player personnel and make the appropriate decisions.  This is the point I am making which you can't understand - Pouye should have been on the floor the entire 4th quarter and not on the bench. 

Your comments about her offensive game do not address the point I was making, the coaching staff knows of her athleticism and for her to be sitting on the bench the second half is why we lost the game.  Her athleticism was needed on the floor.  You clearly don't understand how effective a team can be in a zone when you have athletes on the floor.  Syracuse has played zone defense as long as Boeheim has been the coach and he recruits long, athletic guys best suited for that defensive strategy. 

I'm not saying anything about recruiting strategy here, I am pointing out that by playing a zone defense in the second half with Pouye on the floor could very well have made the difference.  But since you want to play the "what if" game, she could have easily played and picked up 2 fouls and been on the bench anyway in the final minutes, but since she never got off the bench, we won't know.  Point is, she should have been on the floor and we should have switched to a zone defense.

I applaud you being a die-hard fan for a team that doesn't have a lot of interest, especially when compared to the men's team.  But talking about turnovers and coaches adjustments to them is just wrong.  Turnovers are the result of the players on the court, failing to execute the offensive game plan.  Our offensive game plan was ineffective as evidenced by their defensive strategy to make Tess Meyers the number one player to stop.  You made no comments to the points I made about running offensive sets for Tess to get her open looks, instead you focused on turnovers and since you continue to bring up our coaches adjustments to the turnover issue, please enlighten me what adjustments they actually made in this regard.  

I don't claim to know more than the coaches but that doesn't mean based on my past experience of 4 years of being in practice every day that I don't know anything about basketball. You clearly don't like the fact that I am able to articulate clear points about the game result and think of me as some other fan (like yourself) who just watches basketball. I never claimed to know more than the coaches but that doesn't mean I am just a casual fan either.  My points of criticism are targeted to the poor coaching decisions that were made in a game where we lost by one point in a game that would have given us a better position in the standings right before the tournament.   

If you want to focus on turnovers go ahead, but don't attack me because you don't have the same level of knowledge I do when it comes to basketball. 

Maybe you like the staff personally and that's great.  That doesn't mean they are not open to criticism and they are paid to win games. I stand by all of my comments and this point especially, there was no excuse for not having Pouye on the floor at the most crucial point in the game.  

OK - since you actually WORKED with Satalin and Carrol -- I'll CONCEDE --  I'm more of a NUMBERS person --
For example with a "2 point deficit at Halftime"  I would presume the Coaches would look at a 41-39 score differently than a 27-25 score --  And discuss different strategies to erase it.  Ditto in a game where they had 12 turnovers vs. say 6 --  (unless one was a much more up tempo game) and I did say "there is only so much they can do in the 13 minutes or so at half time/

I TRIED to articulate the fact that I'm aware the suggestions/solutions I made WOULD NOT NECISARRILY WORK I mentioned maybe Fatou would have shot her way out of it maybe not--  That maybe regardless of whether the team played man or zone -- Perhaps La Salle could have found other ways to Counter that.--  For her physical limitations I do think Halle is one of the top 5 as far as defense goes - she sometimes guards bigs, sometimes guards smaller players -  That is WHY I wanted her on the floor in the last 7 seconds.

GOOD point about Syracuse --  Georgetown was COMPLETELY the opposite --  Man-to-Man --  Constant player shuffling -- Hack you until the refs stop calling it -- and have Ewing, Mutombo, and Mourning block/goal tend as much as possible and hope the refs stop calling that.  I'd like DU to adopt a philosophy - whether it is man or zone -- say THIS is what we are --

I'm aware that teams would practice particular situations --  My thought could be listed as "given that they practice these things" the coaches go with what they feel best --  rightly or wrongly.

THAT loss was as TOUGH an any the team has endured -- 

IN A PEACE OFFERING I GOOGLED SOME NET RANKINGS FOR THE A-10 ON THE WOMEN'S SIDE - It wasn't the Ken Pom ratings which Phoenix Rising 2 articulates so well on the Men's Board --  I was curious to how DU was ranked (They are #149)  La Salle is 145 -  and St. Joes is 174.  (Dayton is 42  GM is 253)  -  The numbers change daily -- But maybe my theory about Parity isn't far off the mark.

And would you at least concede that there are probably numerous posters out there with very little back ground other than watch games who are more than willing to give Tomlin Sullivan Capel among others free advice -  I thought this could fall under that.

I DO happen to like the staff personally -- I've posted how some teams that are now "up" (like U Mass & RI have been" down"  some teams that have been " up" (like GW") are now "down --  The current staff (and Suzy to a point) have kept DU "up" for the most part even as I started following the ladies seriously when we had our "Dream Team"


As stated given the minimal attention the ladies receive -- I appreciate you at least take the time to post as well (even if we disagree)

PEACE OUT!!!!